: I'm not saying I agree with George on his conclusions about the designs and
: building plans of kayaks being deathtraps. In fact I don't. But, I do
: respect his vocalization of what he believes, that the vast majority of
: designs and plans are dangerous, if not downright deadly. Wouldn't be the
: first time a single voice was right, and the masses were wrong. I believe
: he is wrong, but I'm not so arrogant as to insist it's impossible that I'm
: the one who's wrong.

Nolan, If we are going to talk about safety and threats to life and limb then those topics should be discussed. In my experience I have not found mat fiber,vinylester,polyester,e-glass,s-glass,kevlar,Luane,Okume,Sapele,bias cloth,4-harness weave,white cedar,redwood,cheap chop gun glass, or all the other materials used to make kayaks as very relevant to peoples ability to damage themselves in sea kayaking. I have not read any books,newsletters,magazine articles or stories from friends relating various boat materials as relevant in the topic of injuries sustained in sea kayaking, let alone whether strip-built kayak "A" is made with 3/16" wood and 6oz e-glass on both sides has lead someone to injury and death compared to kayak "B" made from 1/8" strips covered with two layers of 2.3oz harness weave on one side and two layers of 1.7oz kevlar with another layer of2.3 oz harness weave.

George has used unnecessary and personal hyperbolic statements in public forums saying to the effect that a persons life and limb are threatened by making a strip built kayak to methods that are written by Nick and others.

This is plain unadulterated b.s.

: 2

: There is one point that George harps on that I totally agree with. In fact,
: it seems most people on this bbs agree with him on it. That is, the total
: lack of glass layup information from the people selling plans. The #1
: topic of conversation on this board has to do with figuring out if an
: *alternative* method of glassing from the one, single, method described by
: the plan/kit seller as adequate for all uses of the kayak.

: Think about it. We all are constantly deviating from the plans on this point.
: That's because the plans _are_ inadequate. I have never seen a set of
: plans or a book that goes into glass layups for different uses and abuses
: of a kayak, and I've seen a lot of them. They give one lay up method,
: claiming it's adequate for everything. Clearly the builders on this bbs
: don't agree with that.

: We've all been there, staring at the plans and trying to figure out if our
: beaching conditions are rougher then the plan seller was thinking of when
: he said a single layer was adequate. We've all looked at kayak plans and
: wondered if the boat was strong enough for our uses. Especially the people
: that do paddle in the seas, wondering if a deck really can survive ocean
: waves crashing down on it.

: Then we build the boat, and wonder if be built it well enough. Nothing was
: ever mentioned in the book or plans for determining if you actually laid
: the epoxy and cloth well. Just a description of "do it this way, and
: it's fine." That's not adequate for person who's building their first
: boat and never worked with epoxy fiberglass and wood. Hence that
: nervousness on the maiden voyage, the gasp the first time the boat hits a
: rock, and the frantic inspections that follow.

: It's pretty sad in my opinion that the place I had to go to find information
: on layup strengths and evaluating how well I built a kayak wasn't a kayak
: kit or plan seller, but an epoxy manufacturer. Gudgeon Brothers provided
: me with some charts showing the different strengths of various layups, and
: a method for determining if I had laid the fiberglass and epoxy correctly.
: This isn't in any kayak building book I've ever seen, or set of
: instructions that come with a kit or prints. Heck, CLC was downright
: hostile to the notion of deviation and inspection.

: Honestly, I think George is right in that the kit makers and plan sellers do
: us a disservice by not telling us how to test our layup methods and
: skills, and not giving us some information on what we need in building the
: hull for our uses. A Guillemot destined to cross the ocean has very
: different layup needs then a Guillemot destined to paddle around a quiet
: pond. Take a heavily built kayak to the pond and you just have a heavy
: boat. Take an underbuilt kayak out into the ocean, and you may well die
: from it.

Part of the reason people buy books, kits, directions, etc. is so that they can learn,dream and even build a kayak. If in your research you begin to ask questions that's great,it means that you're thinking. But get real, you buy the book or kit because you are making a kayak, YOU ARE NOT STARTING A RESEARCH PROGRAM FOR OPTIMAL LAY-UPS. If you are then take a little more responsibility for your needs that exceed the book writers or the kit builders mission. Which is to sell you a book on how to make a kayak or a kit that enables you to make a kayak. If you want to make a more optimal lay-up FOR YOU then YOU are the one who has to do the work. Go ahead and make different test panels, have fun and bust them up. Make your boats,use them and see where they fail and don't fail. Use this forum.

Your last sentence still makes the association between durability of construction and life threat. It isn't there, the risk is only to the kayak material, ironically you have associated lightly built construction with life risk while George's main thrust is building ultralight kayaks. Take the weight of the lightest sea kayak that he says he can make, I think it's something under 30lbs.,put a 175lb paddler in it and land it in surf. Take your run of the mill first time built stripper or ply boat at, horrors ,48 lbs and take it into the beach. If there is any risk to life and limb it is because you are in the surf not because one boat has a lower strength to weight ratio. Either way the theorizing is all b.s. when communicated without any sense of proportion or respect as George has done.

Lastly this is play,making boats,and having fun. For you to have the level of security you are asking for is unreasonable , in other words: without reason. You need to make it your experience and not through reason.

For you to get the depth and detail (permutations of layups,reams of mechanical data) that is hinted of in this forum requires there to be a real need. For example if a Navy vessel was made of 1/4" cedar strips and peoples lives were dependent upon it, or multi-million dollar prizes were given for the lightest/strongest wood/epoxy/cloth laminate kayak. See what I mean? In the mean time if you're making a CLC boat give me a call at work and I'll be glad to help you out. If you'd like to just chat about glass then you'll have to come up with something a little more enticing like a dinner and movie. cheers-lee